Lee fought in war, and even when he surrendered he didn't abandon his men and take Confedete treasure with him to Mexico or whatever.
That's fine, but I'm talking about what makes someone a traitor or not. Those who think his primary loyalty should be to the state, think he is not a traitor, those who think it should have been to the US, think he is. So like I said, it is in the eye of the beholder.
There was this famous American traitor general who defected to the Brits, except he continued to fight, just for them then. He was the one who defended Bunker Hill, the very battle from the American anthem.
The difference between that guy and a royal governor is that he first joined the revolutionaries and then attempted to betray them.
He didn't flee for his fucking life. He fled for his liberty and wealth.
But why did he not do that the day before? Why had he just concluded a peace treaty then?
Poland, Baltic States, Finland, half of Ukraine, half of Belarus, the fuck you talk about? Dude.
Finland was a separate status in the Russian Empire, as I understand. Its independence also preceded Brest-Litovsk.
Obviously, Belarus and Ukraine did not exist. Those were just Poland, at least cities like Lwow were overwhelmingly Polish. And Poland defeated the USSR in battle.
Estonia also defeated the USSR, or RSFSR or whatever it was called before the Union Treaty.
My point is, this was clearly superior to the alternative of fighting on. They regained all the lands, save Finland, ultimately. It's not as if they were holding most of these lands at the time - they'd have to be reconquered from the Germans even if they had continued the war. That would not have happened, they'd have continued to bleed and St. Petersburg probably would have fallen.
Now, I think Brest-Litovsk led to the Russian Civil War and vastly greater suffering than World War I for the Russians - though there may have been one regardless. Was it worth it for the Bolshies? I think so. It's easier to recruit peasants promising them land against the Whites who were supposedly going to reinstate the landholders, rather than against the Germans. They were also a far less formidable enemy.
Yatseniuk was Yankuvitch's own candidate.
But he was gone, and had no power. He was the American candidate now.
They didn't even impeach him until he vanished (fled and left all of his supporters as confused as you appear to be).
There was no any Poland under either Russian nor German rule, and Poland didn't declare independence for the next half year or so (the Central Powers collapse).
That's fine, but I'm talking about what makes someone a traitor or not. Those who think his primary loyalty should be to the state, think he is not a traitor, those who think it should have been to the US, think he is. So like I said, it is in the eye of the beholder.
The difference between that guy and a royal governor is that he first joined the revolutionaries and then attempted to betray them.
But why did he not do that the day before? Why had he just concluded a peace treaty then?
My point is, this was clearly superior to the alternative of fighting on. They regained all the lands, save Finland, ultimately. It's not as if they were holding most of these lands at the time - they'd have to be reconquered from the Germans even if they had continued the war. That would not have happened, they'd have continued to bleed and St. Petersburg probably would have fallen.
Now, I think Brest-Litovsk led to the Russian Civil War and vastly greater suffering than World War I for the Russians - though there may have been one regardless. Was it worth it for the Bolshies? I think so. It's easier to recruit peasants promising them land against the Whites who were supposedly going to reinstate the landholders, rather than against the Germans. They were also a far less formidable enemy.
But he was gone, and had no power. He was the American candidate now.
They didn't even impeach him until he vanished (fled and left all of his supporters as confused as you appear to be).
There was no any Poland under either Russian nor German rule, and Poland didn't declare independence for the next half year or so (the Central Powers collapse).